Historical insurance transaction system and method

ABSTRACT

The present invention relates to a system and method for conducting historical search transactions that relate directly or indirectly to insurance subrogation and adverse claims. The invention includes a method for the accurate resolution of insurance claims (including claims against self-insureds), and a method for determining the settlement rules applied by an insurer or self-insurer in settling automotive casualty claims.

CROSS REFERENCE

This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No.60/855,851 filed on Oct. 31, 2006, the entire contents of which areincorporated herein by reference, including any references citedtherein.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to the insurance industry and industriesthat interact with those in the insurance industry. More particularly,the present invention relates to a system and method for conductinghistorical search transactions that relate directly or indirectly toinsurance subrogation and adverse claims.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

This invention provides methods for the accurate resolution of insuranceclaims (including claims against self-insureds).

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

According to The Insurance Information Institute, in 1999, operatingexpenses of the average property and casualty insurer exceeded premiumsby over 5%. This indicator has not materially changed in the yearssince. Inefficiencies and unnecessary expenses in the collision repairand automotive parts industries are typically considered to be the mainculprits behind this loss. Historically, insurance companies have beenunable to access real-time information on the purchasing practices ofcollision repair shops; unable to receive more aggressive pricing onparts; and unable to reduce the costs of conducting complianceinspections of repair shop transactions; and unable to confirmavailability and quality of parts appearing on repair estimates.Accordingly, insurance companies simply have not had the information andsystems they need to control repair expenditures and claim costs.Furthermore, without access to real-time information it has beendifficult for the insurance companies to control the proliferation ofabuse and fraud. It is estimated that these two activities account formore than 20% of every claim dollar paid by insurance companies.

Property and casualty insurance carriers account for approximately 90%,or $36 billion, of all collision repair payments in the United States,according to Mitchell International, CCC Information Services, theInsurance Information Institute, Nationwide Insurance, GMAC, Prudentialand AFG, and further supported with Industry-At-A-Glance ResearchReports. The above referenced institutions provide statistics on claimnumbers. This financial position provides insurers with considerableleverage over the collision repair industry. But without control overthe repair estimating process and without timely and accurateinformation on the pricing, quality, and availability of parts before arepair begins, insurance companies lose their leverage. In an attempt toretain control, insurance companies audit repair work on a random basisfor about one-quarter of all their claims. However, the cost of auditingis substantial, ranging from about $85 to over $1,000 per audit. Auditresults indicate that on average repair costs are inflated by over 20%.However, the high cost of auditing restricts insurance companies fromauditing more than about 30% of their claims. An audit provides “afterthe fact” value, but it fails to attack the true issue—how the estimatewas initially developed. The inability of insurers to control estimatedevelopment and to prevent fraudulent transactions causes the propertyand casualty insurance industry to overpay on automotive repair claimsby $7 billion a year.

A solution is to enable insurance companies to affect behavior ofappraisers at the time an estimate is developed by having thoseappraisers substitute higher priced original equipment (“OEM”) partswith less expensive, but like kind and quality aftermarket or recycledproducts on a real-time basis—thereby enabling an accurate severity costto be established for the repair estimate. These solutions helpinsurance companies save money by reducing the cost of the repair,estimated to be $135 per claim, or over $2 billion annually across theP&C Insurance industry. Appraisers and repair shops save time inlocating and obtaining parts and avoiding part disputes with theinsurance company.

These solutions allow the insurance company to remotely review and auditin real-time each repair estimate written, and to take action on theestimate if it was written out of compliance with the insurancecompany's guidelines. The insurance company is also capable of reviewingand auditing each repair shop, staff appraiser or independent appraiserin its actual use (or not) of the approved parts. This system creates anaudit function that is more accurate, time efficient and less costlythan the current periodic physical audit methods, as well as moregranular and definitive than any auditing tools provided throughestimating software companies. Today, a claims appraiser, in order tosave time, will use higher priced OEM parts claiming no availability ofalternative parts. Similarly a repair shop can receive payment for anOEM part and actually use a lower quality, less expensive part withoutthe insurance company having the ability to truly verify the situation.

Subrogated claims are another area of claims, both within the P&Cindustry as well as with self-insured businesses, where tools are neededto assist parties trying to settle claims in a timely manner that areboth fair and accurate. The invention is to develop a tool to addressthe inefficiencies within the practice of managing and settlingsubrogated claims.

The web-based subrogation application creates value throughout theclaims process for companies and self-insured's that require historicalpart availability and documentation support. The invention candefinitively make both the parties to the subrogation process andappraisers more accountable, thereby saving insurance companies andinsured motorists money, and averting potential litigation andarbitration hearings.

The invention is designed to provide subrogation specialists andself-insured's access to real-time data that supports availability ofparts on historical dates, enabling parties involved in the claimsprocess to better identify when an appraiser did not accurately utilizeparts on an estimate and/or accurately document the cost of parts on theestimate. The net result is a higher number of “agreed” corrections onsubrogated claims between parties, reduced arbitration hearings, morefrequent refunds of an insured's deductible, and a reduction in premiumsfor insureds.

Insurance companies subrogate over five (5) million claims annuallyagainst other insurance companies. Similarly, more than five (5) millionclaims are subrogated by companies that are self-insured. Collectively,this represents over $22 billion in repair claims.

Most subrogated claims are six (6)—twelve (12) months old before thesubrogation process begins, but the statute of limitations in somestates is greater than five (5) years.

All insurance companies and self-insured companies maintain guidelinesas to what types of parts can and should be utilized for a repair, whatcosts are acceptable versus excessive, and what documentation is neededto support best practices in establishing repair costs. Once a claim issubrogated, a demanding party sends the subrogated claim to a respondingparty. The responding party reviews the claim estimate to confirm it waswritten with parts and operations that are commercially acceptable. Whenit appears costs are too high or the wrong types of parts are utilized,the responding party seeks a price adjustment from the demanding party.

To support its request for an adjustment the responding party either:

1. Performs a current search to locate commercially acceptable parts anddocuments what those parts do cost, or should cost.

2. Use knowledge from previous claim and repair experience to guess whatcommercially acceptable parts should have been available and what theparts and operations costs should have been.

This information is then presented to the demanding party. Theresponding party will typically request more substantial proof that theparts and prices proposed were actually available on that date in thatarea.

Some users seek methods to get confirmation on parts availability forhistoric dates. The method employed is rarely successful andinfrequently used. A party that receives a subrogated claim may requesta service to verify if parts were available on a given historical date.The service, which may be manual or electronic or a combination of thetwo, will disperse a request to parts suppliers requesting whether suchrequested parts were available on the date specified. A part supplierwill sometimes respond to such a request, although infrequently and withlimited ability to give a definitive answer to the request. The reason apart supplier responds infrequently is because part suppliers only getpaid when they sell a part. A request for information does not drive anyrevenue to the part supplier and in fact takes time away from thepersonnel that would otherwise be handling calls for orders. The reasona part supplier has limited ability to give definitive answers to arequest is because the parts supplier systems are only able to confirmavailability if (1) the specific part requested for the specific make,model, and year vehicle is in fact quoted by that specific supplier onthat specific day, or (2) if the part requested is in stock at the timeof the request by the service AND that the specific part was added intoinventory on or before the date the service is seeking to confirmavailability on. This type of service has had very limited use becauseof the deficiencies outlined above.

Today's subrogation process results in increased claim cost, increasedarbitration hearings, fewer settlements, fewer deductible refunds toinsured motorists, and increased premiums to insureds.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a general illustration of the subrogation process.

FIG. 2 is a Flow diagram showing the operation of the central processinglocation in further detail.

FIG. 3 illustrates a historical insurance transaction systemcommunicatively linked to a WAN.

FIG. 4 is a flow diagram showing a subrogation workflow overview.

FIG. 5 is a flow diagram representing the subrogation authorizationprocess initiated by the external using entity.

FIG. 6A is the subrogation part search vehicle selection page.

FIG. 6B is the subrogation part search estimate page.

FIG. 7 illustrates the process of producing a subrogation report usingthe system of the present invention.

FIG. 8 sets forth a flow process when the user selects the subrogationreport option as indicated in FIG. 5.

FIGS. 9A and 9B are flow diagrams disclosing the data processing systemof the present invention.

FIG. 10 is a flow diagram illustrating the administrative module of thepresent invention.

FIG. 11 is the login screen.

FIG. 12 is the insurance manager summary screen.

FIG. 12A is the insurance manager summary screen after selectingsubrogation.

FIG. 13 is the vehicle selection screen.

FIG. 13A illustrates the vehicle selection screen's company drop-downmenu.

FIG. 13B illustrates the vehicle selection screen's additional drop-downmenus.

FIG. 14 is the main parts search screen.

FIG. 14A is a view of the hierarchical search option for the main partssearch screen.

FIG. 14B is a view of the index search option for the main parts searchscreen.

FIG. 15 is the supplier list page screen.

FIG. 15A is the supplier list page screen showing available aftermarketparts.

FIG. 15B is the supplier list page screen showing the user beingprompted to enter a description

FIG. 16 is the estimate submitted page.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The invention allows a carrier to perform a parts review on an estimateon a specific historical date or range of dates, and in accordance withits own parts' guidelines or the guidelines of the InsuranceCarrier/Self-Insured that subrogated the claim, or against a custom ruleset. This allows a party that receives a subrogated claim to conduct apart and price search with confidence on the exact date an estimate waswritten, and in the same geographic area, versus conducting a search onthe current date the subrogated claim was received by the respondingparty and trying to establish agreement with the demanding party thatthe parts “most likely” were available on the day an estimate waswritten, or on some other past date. The system allows for a search forthe same data points that were on the original estimate AND on theactual date the estimate was written. This allows a party that receivesa subrogated claim to conduct a part and price search with confidence onthe given day an estimate was written, and in the same area, versusconducting a search on the current date and trying to establishagreement with the subrogating party that the parts “most likely” wereavailable on the day an estimate was written, or on some other past dateversus a search for the same data points but on the actual date theestimate was written and/or the repair was completed. The inventionestablishes common ground through an independent service with theindustry's first historical search capability.

In addition to the invention's historical search capabilities, usershave access to electronic communication tools that will enable transferof documentation between the parties. This communication tool is afunctional setting that can be dynamically applied to any user throughthe provisioning functionality of the invention. For example, access toall functionality tools can be granted to users based on individual orgroup classification. An administrator, meaning a user that hasadministrative rights granted through the provisioning tools can definea level of access and/or communication for a group of users or a singleuser. The communication capabilities allow a user with rights toelectronically communicate/transfer estimate information from thesubrogated claim file with required changes identified through theinvention, to an insurance representative or other third party that isinvolved with or responsible for some level of the subrogated claim.Communication can occur via a direct email that originates from theinvention, and automated fax that originates from the invention, areal-time text communication that originates from the invention, or ifboth the subrogating and subrogated parties are integrated with thesystem, both the estimate file and search and changes can becommunicated through the pages in accordance with the system's ASPmodel.

The invention supports download and printing capabilities forcorrespondence or file support, and reporting for users and managers toidentify actual benefit/performance per user, team, company or specificCarrier. The reporting capabilities replace the manual andnon-integrated processes followed by insurance companies and third-partyadministrators involved in subrogation claims today. The inventionenables any user to create a template of reporting that will pull thesubrogated claim information and the historical changesrequested/required into an online data repository. This functionalityenables individual users to eliminate the steps of manually loggingsubrogated claim information with gross changes agreed to between theparties on spreadsheets, access databases, paper templates, etc. Thiselectronic reporting capability also allows a user and insurance companyto track opportunities and changes at the part or line item level of aclaim estimate, versus on the aggregate. To further illustrate thispoint consider today's process where a subrogation specialist willreceive a subrogated claim and follow a process so as to determine andcommunicate what changes need to be made to various line items in aclaim estimate. Once the agreement has been reached between the partysending the subrogated claim (the demanding party) and the partyreceiving the subrogated claim (the responding party), the respondingparty will notate in some electronic or paper journal the total changeto that estimate with some general claim notes and information. Noinsurance company today can relate an agreed upon change to the lineitem of an estimate—meaning it is, for example, impossible for aninsurance company to determine that of the $126,000,000 saved (reducedpayouts due to defending subrogated claims) in the current year, whatamount of that savings was attributable to rental issues, parts issues,labor mistakes, incorrect hours for repair functions, etc. Today, aninsurance company can only identify that individual representatives haveprovided journals that indicate the $126,000,000 has been saved and on aspecific list of claim files. The invention eliminates journal entriesthat deal in aggregate information and allows tracking on a line itembasis. Now through an automated process an insurance carrier orsubrogation party can identify on each subrogated claim where costs andsavings can and should be derived from, as well as where they have beenderived from. This type of information empowers business logic to bedeployed that focus an insurer's resources at the types of items on anestimate that cost the most or provide the most savings, versusreviewing items that return or cost very little. The overall processprovides such efficiency that it allows for greater throughput of fileswith fewer people, and at a significantly lower cost to carriers, andwith significantly better results for insureds that pay deductibles andpremiums.

The reporting capabilities at the management level also allow aninsurance company to identify what subrogating insurance carriers arecosting them the most. For example, through the invention an insurancecompany can identify the number of claims being subrogated from otherinsurance companies in the industry, the average severity levels, thetypes of parts, and other related financial and estimate metrics. Thistype of access to data enables more focused and automated identificationof subrogated claims that should be scrutinized, versus those where verylittle is required. This tracking and measurement capability is anothertool designed to facilitate efficiencies in the subrogation process andaid insurance companies identify where representatives should spendtime. Additional logic feeds this reporting capability that enablesinsurers or self-insureds to discern “estimate guidelines” so that thereview process can be fully automated and alert both parties of issuesand opportunities.

The reporting capability allows management to look at subrogated claimsat the aggregate level (all claims and companies), at the company levelonly, at the company level by user (subrogation specialist managing thespecific subrogated claim), and by the vehicle level with furtherfilters that include make, model or year. This data gathering andreporting capability further allows an insurance company to automate theprocess and also view output reports based upon different aspects of anestimate—by subrogating insurance company. For example, an insurancecompany manager can use the invention's reporting tools to pull detailsout of the repository for all claims that contain certain conditions,such as rental over a dollar amount or time period, OEM parts thatrepresent over a set percentage of parts dollars, Total Lossclassifications, etc. The report does not limit estimate elements, butallows a user to identify and select any element on an estimate bylisting all data codes in the estimate file, such as listed in theindustry CIECA standards.

Reporting can be automated, so typos, omitted information, fraudulentreporting, etc are eliminated, providing more accurate, timely andefficient access to data. Once the reports are created by a user, theinformation can be downloaded into any electronic spreadsheet, wordprocessing system or database software package with a point-and-clickfunction. Additionally, if desired, there are hooks in reportingcapabilities that will allow an insurance company to import thatinformation report directly into its claims system.

The invention facilitates a reduced number of arbitrations by more than50% and will reduce overpayments between parties of more than $2billion.

Referring to FIG. 1, data transmissions 100 from various commercialrecycled, aftermarket, reconditioned, recovered OEM and discounted OEMpart suppliers 102 are received at a central processing location 104.These transmissions 100 contain digital representations of eachsupplier's 102 part inventory, including such things as date of datatransmission, part descriptions, stock numbers, categorizationinformation, physical and condition descriptions, make-model-year thepart is applicable to, pricing and discount information, location andquantity. These transmissions are received both directly from partsuppliers 102 and indirectly through third parties. Transmissions 100are received via the internet, or via direct line, or via dial upconnections, or via a hard copy disc that is absorbed and converted intodata elements. The transmissions 100 can be representations of multiplesupplier's or individual suppliers' inventory at that point in time. Thetransmissions can represent the total inventory at that point in time orthe change in inventory from the last transmission.

The transmissions from various part suppliers 100, also designated“Sources,” are received by central processing location 104 periodically.The frequency of the transmission can be different for various Sources.The present system is designed to accommodate the variability in period,as well as for each Source. The system is designed to accommodate thevariability down to one transmission, for one part change, within arandom period, or the equivalent of a real-time part update transmission100. Parts supplier 102 can provide a real-time part feed, and thecentral processing location can accept, pre-process and log that part'savailability in real-time. This means that the present invention canprovide accuracy to the second of a part coming into the marketplace andas available and being sold out of the marketplace, and hence no longeravailable.

All transmissions 100 undergo filtering or preprocessing, based on arules engine that has rules for various parameters such as partapplicability, part usability, part quality, and make-model-yearinterchangeability. Any and all rule parameters used during filteringand pre-processing can be eliminated based on business design. Allfiltering takes place in a preprocessing computing machine. Since thedatabase contains afternarket, reconditioned, recovered OEM,discontinued OEM, and recycled parts, preprocessing takes place asneeded depending on the frequency of updates provided by the partssupplier. Preprocessing of the supplier inventory allows for parallelupdating of the existing production database while insuring there isminimal down time on the production process.

Preprocessing of the supplier inventory allows for parallel updating ofthe existing production database while insuring there is minimal downtime on the production process. The new production database is thusupdated or created, then moved into the production environment and thedatabase management system is simply pointed to the new database and thechangeover is made without production downtime.

All transmissions 100, even partial update transmissions, at timeschange only non-terminal aspects of part information. A terminal aspectmeans that the part has been in inventory and for some set of reasonshas now left inventory. The system treats terminal events as atransaction completion, i.e., the part entered inventory on this dateand left inventory on the termination event date. The part data andassociated fields remain part of a single row in the database. A changein the non-terminal aspect of a part creates a challenge, because thepart has not left inventory, but some characteristic/descriptor haschanged. A critical criterion of the present system is an accuraterepresentation of the part inventories on the date of interest. Thisrequires that an additional row be started in the database to representthe unique profile change that has taken place in that particular part.This enables the system to show such things as price changes, discountadjustments, or changes to the part description.

The service has a user interface that enables the user to quickly formatqueries to the database. The interface handles client authentication viathe user profile, assigning user rights on the system. The user canquery a specific date or a period, one part or multiple parts, and theuser can specify the region or local area of interest to the particularclaim that is being reviewed. In addition, the user can specify whetherthe query will be executed without material guidelines, with present daymaterial guidelines, or with material guidelines of the selected period.The query is managed by the database management system.

The user can manually enter the query or have the query automaticallydelivered if the record is already available in the system. When theservice is executed in an automatic fashion—that is, when a user doesnot manually format the data queries—the queries are formatted by thesoftware extracting the data queries from a stored data file of a reportor estimate record. The same queries can be executed in either themanual mode or the automatic mode. If an estimate record is located inthe system and a user inputs that claim number, it can be executed. Ifan estimate filed electronically comes into the system, an automatedservice can be performed on that record.

The information returned from the query is formatted and returned to theuser. The user receives back a listing of parts that were available forsale that day or period, the price, in the local of interest. The usercan drill down for additional part information if he/she would like tohave additional information.

The external user entity 106, such as a client insurance company that isreviewing the severity level of its liability or potential liability ina subrogation action in evaluating the subrogation situation, throughthe user interface, contacts the central processing location 104 throughdata transmissions 110, providing the central processing location 104with information, for example, as to the list of parts in question, therepair period of interest, the vehicle make, model, year, the claimnumber and repair location, the name of the insurance company, and theestimated pricing of parts. The central processing location thenprocesses this request and data, and furnishes data transmissions 108back to the external user entity that initiated the request.

After transmissions 100 have been received by central processinglocation 104, and then external using entity 106 is connected to thecentral processing location 104 by use of the aforesaid user interface,data transmissions 108 are sent to the externally using entity. Thesetransmissions include, but are not limited to, parts prices plus savingscompared to an estimate, the parts supplier name and contactinformation, a complete description of all parts, the distance from therepair location of all parts, and the list of available parts matchingthe requested parts.

In one embodiment of the invention, the information received by externaluser entity 106 via transmissions 108 can be furnished to an opposinginsurance company 112 that has initiated a claim, thus allowing externalusing entity 106 to negotiate a settlement with the insurance company112 that initiated the claim being reviewed by insurance company 106.Such information would include the data available through transmission114 in FIG. 1, and includes such data as parts prices plus savingscompared to an estimate, parts supplier name and contact information,complete description of all parts, the distance from the repair locationof all parts, and the list of available parts matching the requestedparts.

In a further embodiment of the present invention, the transmissions 114may be furnished to external entity 112 directly from the centralprocessing location 104, as illustrated in FIG. 1.

Referring again to FIG. 1, information to assist a manager of aninsurance company 116 in the management of several subrogated claims onan on-going basis can be provided by the central processing location 104of the present invention. As indicated by data transmissions 118, theinsurance company manager 116 provides the central processing location104 with the name of the insurance company and the period of timeinvolved, as well as the location, group, region or individual name ofthe manager/insurance company. The central processing location 104 thenprovides a report to the manager 116 including data covering therequested period and showing all claims processed.

FIG. 2 represents a more detailed flow diagram showing the operation ofthe central processing location in further detail. As stated previously,parts suppliers 102 furnish the first subrogation processing part 120are the central processing location 104 with data transmissions 100. Atthe same time that parts suppliers 102 are furnishing data 100 to thefirst part 120, of the central processing location 120, the centralprocessing location via first part 120 is continually and periodicallyrequesting from the parts supplier 102 additional inventory informationand updates 122. The parts information received by first part 120 ofcentral processing location 104 then filters and categorizes all partinventory data as shown at 124. This filtered inventory information 124is then transmitted to the second part 126 of the central processinglocation 104 where the filtered inventory information 124 is applied tothe database 301 (FIG. 3)(A) in the central processing location 104.

A respondent insurance client 106 reviewing the severity level ofliability in a subrogation action initiates an inquiry of the database302 by submitting a request for authorization 128 to the centralprocessing location 104. If properly submitted, the insurance client 106receives a return authorization 130 from the central processing location104. The respondent insurance client 106 then transmits data 110 to thesecond part 126 of the central processing location 104, namely materialguidelines to be used, the calendar period to be reviewed, the partsdesired and estimated pricing, the repair location, the claim number andthe insurance company that is subrogating the claim, and the request forsubrogation. Upon receipt of this transmission 110 from the respondentinsurance client 106, the second part 126 sends a request for the searchof the subrogation database 302 based upon the criteria furnished bytransmission 110 from the insurance client 106. The request is receivedby the third portion 134 of central processing location 104.

Upon completion of the search of the database 302, data transmissions108 are furnished from third part 134 of the central processing location104 to the respondent insurance client 106. This data includes a summaryof all parts available, a complete description of each part, pricinginformation and savings information, and data regarding the distancefrom the repair location of the parts in question. As mentioned above,in one embodiment of the invention, the respondent insurance companyclient 106 can furnish the information received from the third part 134of the central processing location 104 directly to the opposing,demanding insurance company 112 that initiated the claim. In theembodiment illustrated in FIG. 2, transmissions 114 are furnisheddirectly from the third part 134 of central processing location 104 tothe demanding insurance company 112, including a summary of all partsavailable, a complete description of each part, pricing information,savings information and the distance of the part from the repairlocation. By furnishing this information to the demanding insurancecompany 112 initiating the claim, the respondent insurance client 106can more efficiently negotiate a favorable (i.e., more accurate)settlement of the claim, with the demanding insurance company 112.

As shown in FIG. 2, data transmission 136 reflecting data as to eachclaim that is processed is furnished to the fourth part 138 of centralprocessing location 104 to add to the decision-making capabilityprovided by the database 305 at the fourth part 138. In this regard, theinsurance company manager 116 submits a request for authorization 140 tofourth part 138 of central processing location 104. Upon receivingauthentication 142 from fourth part 138, the insurance company managerthen submits transmissions 118 to fourth part 138 requesting informationfor regional group or individuals, or a request for particular insurancecompanies and calendar periods that are stored in the database 302accessible by the fourth part 138 of the central processing location104. Fourth part 138 then sends a request 144 for a subrogation databasesearch based on the provided criteria. The fifth part 146 of centralprocessing location 104 processes request 144 and submits a summaryreport 148 that is created based on the submitted criteria and furnishesthat data back to the insurance company manager 116, as shown in FIG. 2.The insurance client 106 also requests 150 that a report summary ise-mailed back to insurance company 106.

FIG. 3 illustrates a historical insurance transaction system 300 (“thesystem 300”) communicatively linked to a WAN 325. FIG. 1 furtherillustrates a system workstation 315 communicatively linked to the WAN325.

The system workstation 315 includes at least one processor 335, at leastone computer readable medium 330, at least one communications device 350and a display 340. One of skill in the art will appreciate that thesystem workstation 315 components may be connected via a system bus orvia peripheral connections or any combinations thereof. A system user310 accesses the system 300 via a communication link 314 and the WAN325.

The system 300 includes at least one web server 306, at least oneapplication server 304 and at least one database server 302, all ofwhich are communicatively attached via a data network 320. One of skillin the art will appreciate that the servers 302, 304 and 306 may beconsolidated in any topology and in any permutation. One of skill in theart will further appreciate that the database server 302 accesses atleast one storage 303, and that the storage 303 may be local ordistributed relative to the data network 320. The system 300 employs acommunications link 312 to access the WAN 325, thereby interfacing withexternal entities, including but not limited to data aggregators, partssuppliers and the system workstation 315.

FIG. 4 is a flow diagram showing a subrogation workflow overview. Theprocess initiated by an insurance client 400 that has a claim thatrequires subrogation. The insurance client 400 then submits a requestfor authorization 128 (FIG. 1) to access 402 the central processinglocation 104 through the user interface of the central processinglocation. The user, after being authenticated 130, inputs 404 part, timeperiod and search parameter information into the central processinglocation 104. The user then transmits 406 the information to the centralprocessing location 104 via data transmission path 110. The centralprocessing location 104 then authenticates 408 the user and acceptstransitions of subrogation search information. This information istransmitted 128, 130 to another portion of the central processinglocation that interprets 410 the business logic search information,structures the query and pulls in appropriate material guidelines. Thisdata is then transmitted 132 to the third part 134 of central processinglocation 104 to select 412 appropriate sets of material guidelinesdepending on time period search parameters. The request is queried 416for execution of the search. The national part database is then queried418 in the geographical location and time period and with a specificmaterial guidelines for the particular part types requested. Aproduction version of the national part database is created 420, withthe schedule made to batch in real time. The database 302 then collects422 available parts and part information for a user report. The data isthen sent to a report writer 424 for user requested formatting. Next, areport is generated 426 and transmitted to the user 310 via datatransmission 108.

The user receives 428 the requested subrogation report via the userinterface of the central processing location 104. Via transmission 429,in one embodiment of the invention, the user shares 430 information withthe opposing insurance company 112 that initiated the claim, andinsurance client 106 then negotiates settlement using the data providedby the central processing location 104.

Referring to FIG. 4, the process for maintaining the database 302 up todate with parts data begins when the parts supplier maintains 432current inventory information regarding parts, and prepares an update ofsuch information on an agreed schedule. The parts supplier thentransmits 434 the part inventory and the updates to the centralprocessing location 104 via transmission 100. The central processinglocation 104 then receives 436 the supplier part inventory update andstores the data in the database 302. This data is then filtered 438 andprepared for pre-processing, and is pre-processed and prepared 440 forthe production subrogation database 302. This information is thenfurnished to the database 302 shown in block 420 in FIG. 4.

FIG. 5 is a flow diagram representing the subrogation authorizationprocess initiated by the external using entity 106 (FIG. 1). To start asubrogation transaction, the using entity 106 accesses the log-in pageassociated with the computers at central processing location 104. Theuser 310 logs in with their name and password, and if the name andpassword corresponds to an existing profile, the user is given access toa “my page” menu. The user profile defines the user name, company,location, contact information, password and data access rights set byrules embedded in the system 300. As also seen in FIG. 5, if the usercannot enter a proper name and password, entry is prevented but the useris also given the opportunity to register. If the user decides toregister and submits all the required information, the user is thenprovided access to the “my page” menu. If no name and password isentered into the system, the subrogation transaction is halted.

Referring to the claim activity portion of FIG. 5, if the subrogationoption has been selected from the “my page” menu, the using entity 106is then given the option to initiate a subrogation search. If thesubrogation search is initiated, the using entity 106 is advanced to thevehicle selection page. If the subrogation search is not selected, andthe user has selected the subrogation report option, the user isadvanced to the subrogation report page. Also, if the using entity 106selects the subrogation report management option, the user is advancedto the subrogation report managing page.

The process used in the subrogation system 300 of the present inventioncontinues from the vehicle selection page as initially illustrated inFIG. 6A. This is the subrogation part search of the process. Once at thevehicle selection page, the using entity 106 selects from a prioractivity summary table. If there has been no prior activity by thisuser, the using entity 106 selects the insurance company that initiatedthe claim against the using entity 106 from a drop-down table. Thistable allows the using entity to insert the claim number, owner orlocation zip code, five digits of the vehicle identification number, thetotal repair estimate amount, the vehicle owner's first and last name,the beginning search date and the ending search date. Then the user isprompted to select the make, model and year of the vehicle fromdrop-down tables, with the option of adding a second vehicle if desired.If a new vehicle is added, another drop-down table appears whereinadditional information about the second vehicle is inserted.

If the using entity 106 indicates that no additional vehicle is to beadded, the user activates a push button to select parts, which bringsthe select parts page to the screen. The user then indicates whether itdesires to select parts for the search from the list. If yes, the userselects the parts by double clicking on the part, and each part that isselected is moved to a part selected window. The user also has theoption to select category parts for the search from a list by doubleclicking a category list, bringing up a list of parts in a selectedcategory. Parts are then selected by double clicking on the part, eachpart selected moving to the part selected window. In either case,whether the parts are selected from the parts list or from a category ofparts list, the process inquires whether a search period end date hasbeen inputted into the system. If no, a two-week default period for thesearch is entered into the system. If the search period end date hasbeen inputted, the period described for the search is entered into thesystem.

After the search period has been defined, the using entity 106 selectsthe continue button that executes the search for the parts based on asearch radius. A special zip code with regional information algorithmcalculates available suppliers and parts based on the search parametersin the system 300. Selected part types are searched for availability andsupply volume within the geographic area. The system then inquireswhether there are any parts available within the supply volume. If theanswer is no, a list of “no available” parts inventory is made underassociated part type tabs on the supplier's page. If parts are availablewithin the supply volume, a list of available parts under the associatedpart type tab is created on the supplier's page. In either instance, theuser is moved to the part supplier page with selected part types on tabswith available suppliers summarized under each part type, such as:recycle parts, reconditioned parts, alternative parts, OEM (originalequipment manufacture) parts.

The user is then inquired whether they want to add more part types. Ifyes, the user selects the “add more parts” button, and the data is sentto the previously defined push button to select parts, which brings theuser to the select parts page. If the user indicates that no additionalparts are to be added, the user is inquired as to whether to change thesearch radius. If yes, a new radius amount is input into the searchradius field, and that data is furnished back to the inquiry whether thesearch period end data has been input into the system, as previouslydefined. If the user entity indicates that it does not want to changethe search radius, a data page appears showing the following informationon the supplier page under tabs of selected part types: the supplierscompany name and contact information, part description, SKU, price withmarkup, price without markup, and quantity.

The user 310 is then inquired as to whether the parts suppliers havebeen selected from a part type tab. If yes, a particular parts supplierhas been copied and the quantity of one has been marked, and theestimate part description window is open. The user is then asked againwhether the estimate description had been filled out. If the answer isno, the savings calculation cannot be shown. If the answer is yes,information in the two fields of “part description” and “estimate price”can be used for savings calculation.

The user is then inquired as to whether all part type tab parts havebeen selected. If yes, all selected parts supplier information is shownat the bottom of the page window. The user is then given the option tocontinue the process, which moves the user to the estimate page. Theparts selection header on the estimate page displays the followinginformation: the claim number, location, name and model of the vehicle,total loss adjustment figure and date searched. Within the partsselection window under the header, the individual parts selected arelisted with the following information for each part selected: part nameand orientation, part loss cost adjustment, supplier name and contactinformation, part distance from vehicle, available dates within searchperiod, part description, part stock number, part quantity, price withmarkup, price without markup, and estimate price. The using entity 106then has the option of printing the part selected information, e-mailingthe parts selection information to a third party. The user is then askedwhether it desires to process another claim, and if the answer is yes,the user is returned to the vehicle selection page. If the userindicates it does not desire to process another claim, the subrogationpart search is completed, returning to “my page” or to “log out.”

Referring to FIG. 6A, when the subrogation search is initiated, the userentity 106 is inquired whether it desires to select from the prioractivity summary table. If the answer is yes, the act of selecting theparticular claim of interest loads all pertinent information in the pagewhere the user last left the search transaction, and this information ispresented for review by the user. The user is then inquired whether theyare editing a part selection. If yes, the user is advanced to the partsupplier page with the selected part types on tabs with suppliersavailable summarized under each part type, as previously described. Ifthe user indicates that it is not editing a part selection, the user isinquired whether they are reviewing a completed transaction. If yes, theestimate page as shown in FIG. 6B appears before the user, and theprocess continues as described above.

FIG. 7 illustrates the process of producing a subrogation report usingthe system 300 of the present invention. This process is initiated whenthe user selects the subrogation report option and is now on thesubrogation report page. The subrogation report page offers two ways togenerate a report. The user can either search for a specific claim file,or enter specific search criteria for various ranges. If the userselects a specific claim file search, the user is inquired whether aspecific claim number has been entered. If yes, the user selects areview summary. If no, the user inquires whether a specific transactionnumber has been entered. If yes, the user again is advanced to thereview summary. If no, the user is again inquired as to whether or not aspecific claim number has been entered.

If the user answers no to the question whether a specific claim filesearch has been selected, the user is then inquired whether data hasbeen entered into the alternate search area. If yes, the user isinquired whether a dollar amount of the severity range has been entered.If yes, the user is then inquired whether a selected date of the loss inthe date range has occurred, and next the user is inquired whether aselected date has been created in the date range. Next, if the userenters a date range, the user is then prompted to the selection of thereview summary by the user page. At this point, the user is advanced tothe subrogation report page which has a summary heading providing thefollowing data: the search date range, the total number of estimates inthe search, the total computed estimate in the search, the totalestimate part cost in the search, the total database part cost in thesearch, and the lost cost reduction in the search. The user is thenprompted to select the download. If yes, the data is downloaded to theuser. If no, the user is prompted to a page comprising an auto tabsummary of claims contained in the search, providing the following datafor each claim: claim number, insurance company, created date, searchdate, make/model and year of vehicle, insurance company subrogatingagainst, estimate cost, estimate part cost, database part cost, and lossreduction cost.

The user now can select to download this table and then the user isprompted to select to view any claim in detail. If the user selects yes,the user is moved to a subrogation estimate auto detail page for thespecific claim chosen. Next, a page appears with audit details includingthe claim number, the search location number and the date of thesubrogation. Next, a window appears entitled initial estimate windowproviding make/model and year of vehicle and the following information:the part description, the part supplier name, the supplier contactinformation, the distance from the location, the type of partrecycled/reconditioned/after market/OEM, alternative part descriptionand price, quantity, estimate cost, and database cost.

FIG. 8 sets forth a flow process when the user 310 selects thesubrogation report option as indicated in FIG. 5. When that option hasbeen selected, the user is now on the subrogation report management pagewhich provides the user with an option of two ways to generate a reportthat is confined to one office, or spans all offices. These options areto search for a specific claim file or entry specific search criteriafor various ranges. The user is then prompted to indicate whether it hasselected a specific claim file search. If the answer is no, the user isprompted to respond whether data in the alternate search area has beenentered, whether a dollar amount severity range has been entered,whether a selected date of loss and date range has been entered, whethera selected date was created in the date range, whether the user hasentered a date range, whether the user has selected all office locationsor whether the user has selected a particular office location. Once thisinquiry has been completed the user is advanced to the review summarypage.

Where the user 310 selects a specific claim file search, the user isthen inquired whether a specific claim number has been entered, andwhether a specific transaction number has been entered. If thesequestions are answered in the affirmative, the user is prompted to thereview summary page.

From the review summary page, the user is advanced to a subrogationreport page, where a summary header provides the following data: thesearch date range, the total number of estimates in the search, thetotal computed estimate in the search, the total estimate part cost inthe search, the total database part cost in the search, and the totalloss cost reduction. The user is then inquired whether it selects todownload the data. If yes, the information is downloaded to the user, ifno, a page appears titled auto tab summary of claims contained in searchthat provides the following data for each claim: claim number, insurancecompany, created date, search date, make/model and year of vehicle,insurance company subrogating against, estimate cost, estimate partcost, database part cost and the loss reduction cost.

The user is then inquired whether it has selected download. If yes, theabove information is downloaded to the user. If no, the user is inquiredwhether it selects to view any claim in detail. If yes, the user ismoved to the subrogation estimate auto detail page for the claim chosen,where a page appears: indicating the claim number, the search locationand the date of subrogation.

Next, the user is prompted to an initial estimate window which providesthe make/model and year of the vehicle and the following information:the part description, the part supplier name, the supplier contactinformation, the distance from the location, the type of partrecycled/reconditioned, after market, OEM, ultimate part description andprice, quantity, estimate cost, and database costs.

FIGS. 9A and 9B are flow diagrams disclosing the data processing system300 of the present invention. Initially, the database 302 in centralprocessing location 104 receives the data file from the supplier, eithera full file or a delta file, and either a batch file or a real timefile. The data file contains the following information: the Hollanderinterchange number, the Hollander part code, supplier SKU, price withmarkup, price without markup, repair labor hours for part, vehicle modeland year, supplier name, store number, inventory identification number,flag for full file, flag for add/replace/delete part, part description,and free text notes.

The user 310 is then inquired as to several factors, wherein a noresponse to any one of the factors takes the user to the delete partdata row. A series of yes answers to these inquiries takes the user tothe data row validated page. The inquiries that the user 310 is directedto inquire are:

1. Does an IC number exist;

2. Does a part code exist;

3. Does a price with markup exist;

4. Does a supplier SKU exist;

5. Does a price without markup exist;

6. Do labor hours exist;

7. Does the model year exist;

8. Does the model exist;

9. Does the supplier name exist;

10. Does the store number exist;

11. Does the part status flag exist; and

12. Does the inventory ID number exist?

A no response to any of these inquiries will direct the user to thedelete part data row box. From either the data row validated box or thedelete part data row box, the user is directed to an inquiry whetherthere are remaining rows to be validated. If yes, the twelve inquiriesmentioned above are again posed to the user. If there are no remainingrows to be validated, the user checks the free text note attached toeach part to determine the usability of the part by passing the freetext word string through the note interrupter rules engine. The user isthen inquired as to whether the part note has successfully passedthrough all of the rules. If no, the user is directed to the delete partdata row. If the answer is yes, the user is inquired whether there areremaining rows to be filtered. If yes, the user is directed to the aboveinquiry whether the part note successfully passes through all the rules.If the answer as to whether there are remaining rows to be filtered isno, the process creates a unique MD five hash for each part row withinthe remaining data base utilizing the following information: partsupplier name, store number, and inventory identification number.

The user 310 is then inquired whether the status field has an “A.” Ifyes, a unique part row for this part is added in the part inventory. Ifno, the user inquires whether the status field has an “R”. If theresponse is yes, the process replaces the existing part row withmatching hash with a new unique part row for this part in the partinventory. If the status field does not have an “R”, the user inquireswhether the status field has a “D”. If the answer is yes, the processwill delete this part row from the part inventory. Following the inquiryregarding the status field, and referring to FIG. 9B, the process startsthe database update with validated and filtered part data and opens theresponding file. The user 310 is inquired whether the part row hashmatches the existing database. If the answer is no, the process directsthe user to an indication that the part does not exist and needs to becreated. If the part row hash matches the existing database, theprocessor knows that the part row exists and needs to be updated. Theuser is then inquired whether the status is either add, replace, ordelete. If the status is to be added, the processor reads that thestatus is inconsistent with the database update process and there is anerror, and the part row is discarded. If the response to the inquiry isto replace the status, two update actions are required. The first is toend the available date on the existing matched row in the part database—the date being the previous day's date. The second is to create aunique part row. If the inquiry response is to delete the status, thematched part row is updated by adding the ending availability date.

Where the status is to replace the part row, the two update actions setforth above are taken, and the processor then creates a new unique rowin the part inventory database with the following part information: partname, supplier name, supplier contact information, supplier storenumber, inventory ID, part SKU, price with markup, price without markup,hash number, interchange number, part code, labor hours, notes, model,vehicle year, beginning available date, sequence of available dates, andending available date. In addition, if the part row does not existinitially and needs to be created, all the data used to create the partrow is also fed into the creation of the new unique row in the partinventory database as described above.

After the system 300 updates the matched part row by adding an endingavailability date, or creates a new unique row in the part inventorydatabase, the user 310 is inquired whether the update file is in acalendar sequence. If no, all previous part rows are marked as unknownbetween the last update and the present update. If the update file is inproper calendar sequence, the data processor places the updated partinventory database in production.

The administrative module of the present invention is illustrated as aflow diagram in FIG. 10. The process begins by the user 310 bringing upthe appropriate web page and entering the proper user ID and password.Once the user ID and password are authenticated, the user is directed tothe “My Page” screen, where the user then selects “subrogation”. Next,the user selects “subrogation management report” to move to themanagement report page.

The user is then prompted to select if it desires to search bygeographical area. If yes, the geographical area selected. If no, theuser inquire whether it desires to search by organizational entity. Ifyes, the user selects the organizational entity. If no, the user isinquired whether it desires to search by individual in theorganizational entity. If yes, the individual is selected. If no, theuser is inquired whether it desires to search by particular insurancecompanies. If the answer is yes, the appropriate insurance company. Ifno, the user is inquired whether it desires to search by dollar limitson claims. If yes, the user enters the upper and lower limit of thedollar amount. The users then inquire whether to search by dollar limitsof savings. If yes, an upper and lower savings limit is entered.

If either a yes or no answer is given to the inquiry as to searching bydollar limits of savings, based on the search criteria, the processexecutes the search and returns subrogated claims that are within thesearch criteria. Within the search criteria summary information isreturned for each claim as follows: a total number of estimates, totalcomputed estimates, total estimate part cost, total database part cost,and total cost reduction. The additional detail is also furnished: claimnumber, insurance user, created date, search date, make/model, insuredcompany, estimate cost, estimate part cost, database part cost, and lossreduction.

The user 310 is then queried whether a full detail on a particular claimis needed. If yes, the user can select a view of any particular claimand the claim detail becomes available, including the parts available,the parts selected, supplier contact information, part descriptions, SKUnumbers, estimate line item cost, database line item cost, line itemcost reductions and claim totals. If the answer to the query whether afull detail on a particular claim is negative, and after the userselects the view of any particular claim, the user is then inquiredwhether it desires to email or print the information. If yes, the usercan select the choice of transmitting the information. If no, the useris inquired as whether it desires to initiate another search. If theanswer is yes, the user is directed to the beginning of the searchprocess. If the answer is no, the user is directed to log out from thesystem.

In one embodiment of the subrogation system, the user 310 can log in atthe appropriate website with a pre-designated user 310 ID and passwordat the login screen 500 (FIG. 11) to begin the subrogation searchprocess. In operation, as shown in FIG. 11, the user 310 enters the user310 ID and password and then clicks the “enter” button 505 on the loginscreen 500. The user 310 is transferred to the Insurance Manager Summaryscreen 510 shown in FIG. 12. To enter the subrogation system, the user310 clicks on the “Subrogation” link 512 also shown in FIG. 12. Afterselecting “Subrogation” 512, the user 310 is presented with twoselection choices in FIG. 12A—“Subro Search” 515 and “Subro SearchManagement” 517. The user 310 selects “Subro Search” 515 to proceed withthe search process and enter the vehicle and parts' selection screens.As best seen in FIG. 13, a user 310 can also view prior activity, ifany, on the vehicle selection screen 520. The prior activity table 522shows in process and completed activity for various other searches ifavailable. Various column headings 524, also shown in FIG. 13, provideorganizational structure for the table 522 and provide a user 310 withthe ability to sort data in the table 522 by selecting and clicking on aparticular column heading 524. For the illustrated search shown in FIG.13, no prior activity is presently available.

FIG. 13 further illustrates the data entry fields to begin a newsubrogation search process for a specific new vehicle at 526. The user310 first has an option to select a represented insurance company fromthe drop-down menu 530 shown in FIG. 13A. After selecting the insurancecompany at 530, the user 310 enters information in the fields for theclaim number 532, the zip code 534, the total estimate amount 536, the“from date” 538, as well as make 540, model 542, and year 544. Make 540,model 542, and year 544 are selected from the drop-down menus asindicated in FIG. 13B. The VIN 546 field will auto-fill in theillustrated embodiment. If the system fails to auto-fill the VIN, itwill be necessary for the user 310 to enter the last five digits of thevehicle's VIN. The fields for the owner's first name 548 and last name550 will also automatically populate based on the system user 310. Whenall data is entered and the user 310 is ready to proceed through thesystem, the “Select Parts” 552 button should be selected to advance tothe next screen and search for the parts required for cost estimationand availability.

FIG. 14 shows the main parts search screen 555 in the Subrogation systemof the present invention. A user 310 can search for parts in three ways.First, a user 310 may scroll through the parts listed alphabetically inthe main table 557 in FIG. 14. Second, a user 310 may perform ahierarchical search by selecting a category at 559 to expand intosub-categories as shown in FIG. 14A for a narrower search. Third, a user310 may perform an index search by entering a key word or words at 562as shown in FIG. 14B. The system will provide a list of parts 564containing those key words. The user 310 then selects the desired partsfrom the list by highlighting those entries as shown at 566 in FIG. 14B.

Parts selection in all three processes occurs via clicking on the partname in the “Parts List” box 560. Clicking on the part name a secondtime will de-select the part. All part selections will appear in theparts selection box 570. In FIG. 14B, the parts selections box 570 ispopulated with the parts selected by the user 310. To proceed throughthe system the user 310 then selects the “Continue” button 572 as seenin FIG. 14B.

The user 310 will then be presented with a “Supplier List Page” 575screen. (FIG. 15) Tabs 577 associated with a particular selected part onthe screen 575 denote the parts' availability. When a tab 577 isselected, a list of suppliers will be displayed by category. Forexample, Recycled, Aftermarket, OEM, Reconditioned, and Recovered OEMcategories for suppliers shown at 580 may be listed on the screen 575.Supplier options and prices, if available, will be viewable directlybelow the parts tabs in the space indicated at 585. Tabs 579, 582, 583,584, 586 and 587 as seen in FIGS. 15, 15A, and 15B denote that no partsare available. Tabs at 581 indicate that the part is currently selectedfor viewing, and available parts are visible in the space provided at585. FIG. 15A shows available aftermarket parts in the space at 585 forthe parts selected at 581. To choose a supplier for an available part,the user 310 will select the “Copy” button at 590. As best seen in FIG.15B, the user 310 will then be prompted to enter a description at 592,if desired, and a parts price at 594 from the estimate being reviewed.After selecting and reviewing part availability at 596, the user 310 canproceed through the system to the “Estimate Submitted” screen byselecting the “Continue” button 572.

In FIG. 16 of the illustrated embodiment, the “Estimate Submitted” page598 provides the user 310 with a printable document of part availabilityat the time of the original estimate. Information in this report caninclude the claim number, search location, make, model, and yearinformation, and the date the search was performed. The system also canprovide a lost cost adjustment at 599 which is the difference betweenpart savings found through the system of the present invention whichwere available at the time the original estimate was written and thoseused in the original estimate.

While the description above refers to particular embodiments of thepresent invention, it will be understood that many modifications may bemade without departing from the spirit thereof. The accompanying claimsare intended to cover such modifications as would fall within the truescope and spirit of the embodiments of the present invention.

1. A method of settling an automotive casualty claim, comprising: a)receiving a claim, the claim including: i) an identification of avehicle part that is damaged, and ii) an identification of a timeassociated with the claim, b) querying a database of historical vehiclereplacement parts information, the database including: i) identificationof specific replacement parts, ii) the times during which thereplacement parts were available, iii) the number of replacement partsthat were available at various times, and iv) the prices of thereplacement parts at the respective times during which the replacementparts were available, wherein the query seeks an identification of (1)the availability of a replacement part for the vehicle part that isdamaged at times near to the time associated with the claim, and (2) thecost of the replacement part at that time, c) determining a price to bepaid for the replacement part based on the price of the replacementparts available at the time associated with the claim.
 2. The method ofclaim 1, wherein: a) the claim further includes an identification of alocation associated with the claim, b) the database further includes thelocations at which the replacement parts were available and the numberof replacement parts available at each location at the respective timesat which the replacement parts were available, and c) the determinationof the price to be paid is further based on the distance between thelocation of the replacement parts available at the time associated withthe claim and the location associated with the claim.
 3. The method ofclaim 2, wherein: a) the database further includes an identification ofthe type of the replacement part, the type being selected from the groupconsisting of new, reconditioned, remanufactured, and used, b) the queryfurther seeks an identification of the condition of the replacementpart, and c) the price to be paid is further determined based on thecondition of the replacement part to be used.
 4. The method of claim 3,wherein the query of the database is limited to a geographic areaincluding the location associated with the claim.
 5. The method of claim3, wherein the new part is identified as either an OEM or non-OEM newpart.
 6. The method of claim 3, wherein the time associated with theclaim is the time at which a repair estimate is made. 7 The method ofclaim 3, wherein the time associated with the claim is the time at whichthe damage occurred.
 8. A method for determining the settlement rulesapplied by an insurer or self-insurer in settling automotive casualtyclaims, the method comprising: a) receiving data concerning i) the cost,type, and availability of each replacement part paid for by the insurerwhen settling previous claims, ii) a time associated with the settledclaim, iii) the location at which the repair estimate used as the basisfor settling the claim was made, and iv) the age and condition of theautomobile that was the subject of the claim, and b) inferring theinsurer's settlement rules from the data.
 9. The method of claim 8,wherein the cost of the replacement parts is correlated with thecondition of the replacement parts.
 10. The method of claim 8, whereinthe cost of the replacement parts is correlated with the location of thereplacement parts.
 11. The method of claim 9, wherein the condition ofeach replacement part is selected from the group consisting of new,reconditioned, remanufactured, and used.
 12. The method of claim 8,wherein the received data further includes the location of thereplacement parts.
 13. A method of settling automotive casualty claims,the method comprising: receiving an insurance claim, identifying ademanding party and a responding party, applying an algorithm to thesettlement rules for the demanding party and the responding party todetermine joint settlement rules, the joint settlement rules satisfyingthe settlement rules of the demanding party and the responding party andincluding rules for selecting an estimated price for a replacement partto a damaged vehicle, applying the joint settlement rules to theinsurance claim.
 14. The method of claim 13, wherein the settlementrules for the demanding party or responding party are determined by amethod comprising: a) receiving data concerning: i) the cost, type, andavailability of each replacement part paid for by the demanding party orresponding party when settling previous claims, ii) a time associatedwith the settled claim, iii) the location at which the repair estimateused as the basis for settling the claim was made, and iv) the age andcondition of the automobile, b) inferring settlement rules from thedata.
 15. The method of claim 14, wherein the cost of the replacementparts is correlated with the type of the replacement parts.
 16. Themethod of claim 14, wherein the cost of the replacement parts iscorrelated with the location of the replacement parts.
 17. The method ofclaim 14, wherein the data concerning the type of each replacement partis selected from the group consisting of new, reconditioned,remanufactured, and used.
 18. The method of claim 17, wherein the newpart is identified as either an OEM or non-OEM new part.